One of the reasons of the decision is that freedom of information
would cost too much for the state. Another reason is, that there
are few complaints
about the lack of freedom of information at the moment. (Does
this make sense? How should costs be high, if people at the
moment do not complain about the lack).
But how should Germans get to know about freedom of information,
if the Land Baden-Württemberg refuses to translate
recommendations of the Council of
Europe? The main reason these recommendations are not translated
is again costs.

Germany spends about 270 000 million  (EURO) per year
for it's health system. According to the World
Health Report 2000 Germany has the most expensive health
system in the EU,
but is on rank 25
among industrial states looking at the quality of services.

On of the poorest countries in Europe is Moldavia. Article 34 of
the constitution guaranties freedom of information, in Article 4
human rights are made part
of the legal system (if there is a conflict with domestic law,
human rights are higher) and in Article 23, the state has
the duty to publish these
rights: http://www.ifes.md/constitution/

Copy: President of the EU Commission, EU Council,
UNHCR-Special Rapporteur

Support Freedom of Information by
E-Mail to the European Commission and Council with a copy to the
European Parliament.

Freedom
of information came 1766 to
Sweden, 1951
to Finland, 1966
to den USA and 1970 to
Norway. In 1981 the Council of Europe gave "Recommendation
No. R (81) 19" on the access to information held by
public authorities. Since then both EU and nearly all countries
in the EU and Europe adopted such laws. However citizen rights in
member states vary and there are no minimum standards. In order
to keep up with the international development freedom of
information should be strengthened in EU member states.